| 1 |
On Tuesday, 4 December 2018 20:57:11 GMT Neil Bothwick wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tue, 04 Dec 2018 14:23:27 -0500, Jack wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On 2018.12.04 14:13, Neil Bothwick wrote: |
| 4 |
> > >> One thing I've done in the past if something failed after a long |
| 5 |
> > >> time compiling is to cd to the top build dir (under the Portage tmp |
| 6 |
> > >> dir) and just continue the compile (either make or ninja, or |
| 7 |
> > >> whatever that package uses) when/if that finishes, you can use |
| 8 |
> > >> ebuild to finish the install and qmerge steps. That avoids needing |
| 9 |
> > >> to start the compile from the beginning. |
| 10 |
> > > |
| 11 |
> > > You can use ebuild for that too, with the compile option. I've have |
| 12 |
> > > the chromium build fail for apparently random reasons on my laptop |
| 13 |
> > > from time to time and ebuild ... compile finishes the process. |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> > Unless I'm mistaken, "ebuild /path/to/ebuild compile" does avoid |
| 16 |
> > redoing the unpack, prepare, and configure steps, but it starts the |
| 17 |
> > compile from scratch. Manually doing "make" (or whatever) in the |
| 18 |
> > appropriate directory avoids repeating those parts of the compile that |
| 19 |
> > were successful. If the compile takes two days, that's a significant |
| 20 |
> > savings in time. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> It starts the compile by running make or whatever is appropriate for the |
| 23 |
> build, so it doesn't need to build anything already built any more than a |
| 24 |
> bare make does. But using ebuild compile means you get the same |
| 25 |
> environment as when you started the compile. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Which will be counterproductive if the reason the compile failed is because |
| 28 |
RAM was exhausted and you need to reduce the job number. Could I define |
| 29 |
MAKEOPTS on the CLI when running ebuild by hand? |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
Regards, |
| 33 |
Mick |
Archives